Peace Philosophy Centre, based in Vancouver, Canada (est. 2007), provides a space for dialogue and facilitates learning for creating a peaceful and sustainable world. ピース・フィロソフィー・センター（カナダ・バンクーバー ２００７年設立）は平和で持続可能な世界を創るための対話と学びの場を提供します。欢迎来到和平哲学中心！我们来自加拿大温哥华，我们致力于促进对话及建立可持续发展的和平世界。欢迎您留下宝贵的评论。To contact us, use the Contact Us form in the right side bar of this blog. Follow Twitter: @PeacePhilosophy / "Like" Facebook: Peace Philosophy Centre

Pages

To view articles in English only, click HERE. 日本語投稿のみを表示するにはここをクリック。点击此处观看中文稿件。한국어 투고★Follow Twitter ツイッターは@PeacePhilosophy and Facebook★投稿内に断り書きがない限り、当サイトの記事の転載は許可が必要です。このブログの右サイドバーにある Contact Us フォームで連絡ください。Re-posting from this blog requires permission unless otherwise specified. Please use the Contact Us form in the right side-bar to contact us.

In December 2012, not a few people in
Japan remembered the 75th anniversary of Nanjing Massacre. Those
people hoped that the lessons from war crimes committed by the Japanese Army
from 1931-1945 would be learned so that Japan would never wage war against
another country again, and peace would be achieved in East Asia. These
Japanese, however, now face a major challenge.

In Japan’s general election of Dec. 16th
the Liberal Democratic Party, which had been in opposition since August 2009,
won an overwhelming majority putting it back in power. With Abe Shinzo, a right-wing
historical revisionist back as prime minister, the change of government is no
longer just a Japanese issue.

The LDP is a nexus for history deniers
who regard calls for historical reconciliation from neighboring countries as
unjustified, deem their historical accounts as inaccurate, and claim that
listening to such appeals for Japan to remember the past would be "masochistic.”
As LDP president, Abe most eloquently embodies this character of the party.

With the signing of the Treaty of Peace
in San Francisco (September 1951), Japan was allowed to resume its place in the
international community. Japan’s neighbors in Asia expected it, in return, to scrap
its imperial past and apologize sincerely for perpetrating a string of wartime
atrocities. But while the Federal Republic of Germany began its postwar period
by breaking from Nazism and apologizing for the Holocaust, the LDP, which ruled
Japan for most of the postwar period, has acted as a hub for history
revisionists, and so it remains.

It is impossible to imagine that
somebody who denies the Holocaust would be elected as Chancellor of Germany.
What the world is witnessing right now in Japan, seventy-five years after the Nanjing
Massacre, is the reappointment as prime minister of an extreme rightist who
sides with the Nanjing-deniers.

The people of Asia, where millions were
killed by Japanese wartime aggression, and where many witnesses and survivors
are still alive, have the right to ask this prime minister if he really
believes that the Nanjing Massacre was a myth, and if he recognizes that Japan
invaded neighboring countries.

The people of both Koreas and Koreans
around the world are entitled to challenge Abe on whether he recognizes the
Japanese Army’s wartime enslavement of thousands of women (so-called “military ‘comfort
women’”), one of the most ferocious and dishonorable crimes of Imperial Japan.
This prime minister has been adamant about removing any description of these
crimes from textbooks and classrooms.

Here is a fundamental question.
Sixty-one years after the resumption of sovereignty, does Japan, led by such a
prime minister, truly deserve to be a legitimate and credible member of the
international community? It is the people of Japan who, first and foremost, are
responsible for asking that question, and the people of Asia and beyond are
entitled to pursue it, and to demand clear answers.

1.
Who is Abe Shinzo?

Abe Shinzo’s father was Abe Shintaro,
who held various key government positions including Foreign Minister and was at
one point a candidate for an LDP presidential election. Abe Shinzo used his
father’s coattails to get elected to the Diet for the first time in 1993. He is
a peculiar existence within the LDP, having climbed the party by consistently advocating
extreme right-wing policies. Here are some of his career highlights.

As soon as Abe was elected in 1993, he became a
member of the LDP’s “History and Deliberation Committee.” This committee held
about twenty meetings with right-wing scholars, and as a result, published
a book called “Overview of the Greater East Asia War,” on August 15th,
1995, the fiftieth anniversary of Japan’s defeat in the Asia-Pacific War.
The book argues: 1) “The Greater East Asia War” (the Asia-Pacific War) was
not an aggressive war, but a war for self-existence and self-defense, and
for liberation of Asia from Western powers; 2) Events such as the Nanjing
Massacre and the “comfort women,” are fabrications. Japan did not commit
war crimes and was not a perpetrator; 3) Since “biased” school textbooks
contain false information about Japan’s wartime activities, a “textbook
struggle” (an attack on education) is necessary. Abe still holds these
positions.

In
December 1994, a right-wing group called “Diet Members’ League for the 50th
Anniversary of the End of War” was formed to counter a parliamentary move
to pass a resolution in August 1995, critically reflecting on Japan’s aggressive
war. Abe was selected as deputy executive director. This group organized the “Steering Committee
of Japanese People’s Movement for the 50th Anniversary of the
End of War” in conjunction with far-rightist religious groups (mostly
Shinto). It led twenty-six prefectural assemblies and ninety municipal
assemblies across the nation to pass resolutions opposing the critical
resolution and arguing that Japan did not invade its Asian neighbors.

The
same right-wing members of LDP in June 1996 formed a new group to attack
history textbooks, called “Bright Japan - League of Diet Members,” and Abe
was appointed deputy executive director. In February 1997, he formed a
group called “Group of Young Diet Members for Consideration of Japan’s
Future and History Education,” and became its executive director (“Young”
was dropped from the group’s name in 2004).

Abe
has always been on the frontline of such groups and has worked hard to scour
descriptions of Nanjing and the sex slaves, who he argues were
“prostitutes,” from textbooks. He pressured not only education ministry officials
responsible for textbook screening, but also presidents of textbook
publishers and textbook authors, to remove references to such crimes,
claiming that they were “distorted.”

While
Abe was Chief Cabinet Secretary, he complained about the content of an NHK
(Japan’s national public broadcaster) program on the sex slaves issue before
it was broadcast, demanding that the head of the Broadcasting Bureau make
the program “fair and objective,” or resign. As a result, significant changes
were made to the program before it was screened on January 30, 2001. One
of the changes was deletion of the part where the Women’s International
War Crimes Tribunal, held in Tokyo in December 2000, deemed the rapes and
the military sex slavery system by the Japanese military as “crimes
against humanity,” and held Japan and Emperor Hirohito responsible for
them.

2.
Attack on the Kono Statement

On August 4, 1993,
during the Miyazawa administration, then Chief Cabinet Secretary Kono Yohei released
a statement on the result of a study into the “comfort women” issue. Commonly
called the Kono Statement, it said the following:

As a result
of the study which indicates that comfort stations were operated in extensive
areas for long periods, it is apparent that there existed a great number of
comfort women. Comfort stations were operated in response to the request of the
military authorities of the day. The then Japanese military was, directly or
indirectly, involved in the establishment and management of the comfort
stations and the transfer of comfort women. The recruitment of the comfort
women was conducted mainly by private recruiters who acted in response to the
request of the military. The Government study has revealed that in many cases
they were recruited against their own will, through coaxing, coercion, etc.,
and that, at times, administrative/military personnel directly took part in the
recruitments. They lived in misery at comfort stations under a coercive
atmosphere.

The fiercest
criticism against the Kono Statement came from within LDP, namely Abe.

He
and his “Group of Young Diet Members for Consideration of Japan’s Future
and History Education,” called Kono to a meeting and argued that Kono had recognized
the “coerciveness” of the act without convincing evidence, as the Korean
side demanded so, but Kono stuck to his guns. At the House of
Representatives Budget Committee on May 27, 1997, Abe further said there
was no need to specifically reference the issue in textbooks unless the
women were coerced, and no document had been discovered to verify this.

On
June 14, 2004, Abe, then Secretary General of LDP, told a symposium
organized by the “Group of Diet Members for Consideration of Japan’s
Future and History Education,” that “there was no such historical fact as
the military comfort women,” totally ignoring the Kono Statement. Abe went
on to say that he would actively work with MEXT (Ministry of Education,
Culture, Sports, Science and Technology) to “improve textbooks,” meaning
the removal of all descriptions of “military ‘comfort women.’”

3.
Double-tongued Prime Minister

Abe was first elected Prime Minister on
September 26, 2006. As a state head, there was only so much history revisionism
that he could get away with. History denial might be tolerated within the LDP
or even within Japan, but it was evident that it would invite international
animosity and backlash. One area where his position caused much international
embarrassment was the military sex slavery issue.

At the House of Representatives’ plenary session on
October 4, 2006, Abe said: “The government’s basic position is that it
follows the Kono Statement.” Perhaps due to the subsequent criticism from
the right-wing forces that supported Abe, on March 5, 2007, he again
stated that the government would “continue to follow the Kono Statement,”
but added that “there was no evidence that verifies coercion,
narrowly-defined coercion such as authorities breaking into houses to take
away women like kidnappers would,” suggesting that the “coercion” part of Kono
Statement needed to be modified.

On January 31, 2007, when a Democrat Congressman
Mike Honda introduced a resolution calling for the Japanese government to
“formally acknowledge, apologize, and accept historical responsibility in
a clear and unequivocal manner for its Imperial Armed Forces’ coercion of
young women into sexual slavery,” Prime Minister Abe fought back. He said he had “no plan to apologize”
even if the resolution was adopted, and argued that there was “no evidence
that supports ‘narrowly-defined coercion,’ or the allegation that Japanese
soldiers kidnapped women and coerced them.” This was despite the fact that
the Kono Statement had expressed “sincere apologies and remorse to all
those, irrespective of place of origin, who suffered immeasurable pain and
incurable physical and psychological wounds as comfort women.” Abe’s
statement, which suggested the women had voluntarily provided sex to
Japanese soldiers, was criticized by U.S. newspapers including The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and The Boston Globe.

Abe could no longer ignore such criticisms,
particularly those coming from the US and other Western countries. The BBC reported on April 27, 2007 that
Abe, in a meeting with President Bush at Camp David, said, “I feel deeply
sorry that they [the victimized women] were forced to be placed in such
extremely painful situations.” Newsweek
interviewed Abe prior to his departure to the US, and reported on April
27, 2007 that Abe said “We feel responsible for having forced these women
to go through that hardship and pain as comfort women under the
circumstances at the time.” He apparently admitted “coercion” in these
reports, revealing his double-tongued strategy.

4.
Abe bares his teeth again

Right after his policy speech on September 12, 2007, Abe suddenly
abandoned his job on the day he was supposed to answer questions by all the
parties’ representatives. He was criticized from all sides for his irresponsibility.
However, somehow helped by the forgetful nature of the people of Japan, he was
re-elected as president of LDP on September 26, 2012. Around the same time he
started to intensify his far-rightist rhetoric as if trying to recover his
reputation and career, which had disappointed right-wing supporters during his
previous term.

On February 20, 2012, Kawamura
Takashi, Mayor of Nagoya City stirred controversy when he expressed his
doubts over the occurrence of the “so-called Nanjing Incident” in a meeting
with leaders of the Nanjing City Committee of the Chinese Communist Party.
In response, right-wing forces in Japan held an urgent meeting titled “Supporting
the ‘Kawamura Statement’ - Condemning the myth of ‘Nanjing Massacre,’” to
which Abe sent a message of support. The August 3 and September 24
versions of the Sankei Shimbun, virtually
the official newspaper of Japan’s right, ran an advertisement supporting
Nagoya Mayor Kawamura’s Nanjing Statement. Abe acted as one of the proposers.

In an interview with the Sankei on
August 28, 2012, Abe laid out his agenda.
If the LDP returned to power, it would be necessary to review the
Kono Statement, he said and to issue a new government “understanding” of
it. His subjects for review included “The Statement by Chief Cabinet
Secretary Miyazawa Kiichi on History Textbooks,” known as the “Miyazawa
Statement” or the “Neighboring Countries Clause,” in which Miyazawa stated
that “from the perspective of building friendship and goodwill with neighboring
countries,” Japan will “pay due attention” to criticisms by the
neighboring countries such as China and Korea on some descriptions in
Japanese textbooks, and “make corrections at the Government’s
responsibility.” He would also
review the “Murayama Statement” (“Statement by Prime Minister Murayama Tomiichi
‘On the occasion of the 50th Anniversary of the War’s End”),
issued on August 15, 1995.

The
Murayama Statement says, “During a certain period in the not too distant past, Japan, following a mistaken
national policy, advanced along the road to war, only to ensnare the Japanese
people in a fateful crisis, and, through its colonial rule and aggression,
caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries,
particularly to those of Asian nations. In the hope that no such mistake be
made in the future, I regard, in a spirit of humility, these irrefutable facts
of history, and express here once again my feelings of deep remorse and state
my heartfelt apology.” Abe, in his previous term as Prime Minister, had in fact
said that this statement was “the government’s understanding.”

Suga Yoshihide, Chief Cabinet
Secretary of the new Abe Cabinet said in a press conference of December
27, 2012 that “there have been many studies by experts, and it is
desirable to continue academic examination” about the Kono Statement. It
is possible that Abe will again change his position on the issue of
“coercion” in military sex slavery, which he admitted during his previous
term by “following” the Kono Statement. Regarding the Murayama Statement,
Suga in the above press conference said the government would “follow the
position of the past cabinets." Only three days later, on December
30, Abe, in an exclusive interview with the Sankei Shimbun, reportedly said, "The Murayama Statement
was one issued by the Japan Socialist Party's Prime Minister Murayama
Tomiichi. I would like to release a future-oriented statement that is
suitable for the twenty-first century." As discussed above, Abe
originally attacked the Murayama Statement when it was issued in 1995. When
he became prime minister in 2006, he changed his position to “follow” the
statement. Then after he resigned in 2007, he publicly stated his
intention to review” it, and within a week of his re-appointment as prime
minister, he and his Cabinet sent a mixed message to the world, to
"follow" and "revise" it.

On
April 10, 2012, a joint meeting of LDP’s “Education and Science Committee”
and the “Group of Diet Members for Consideration of Japan’s future and
History Education” was held, in which MEXT officials discussed the latest
screening of high school textbooks.
Abe condemned the MEXT officials, saying that some textbooks said
the “comfort women” were “mobilized” and “rounded up.” Abe interrogated the officials on how
and when such “changes” were made, even though he had denied coercion in
the “so-called ‘comfort women’” cases in the Diet when he was prime minister.
According to Abe, textbooks with descriptions of the “comfort women” were
“far from common sense.” LDP Diet members at the meeting blamed MEXT for
leaving such references in high school textbooks even though junior high
school textbooks had been cleansed.

Abe’s argument that
the MEXT officials “changed” their understanding of “coercion” is groundless.
What he was referring to was a written answer that got Cabinet approval on
March 16, 2007 in response to a written inquiry by a member of the House of
Representatives Tsujimoto Kiyomi, while Abe was prime minister. There he stated
that the basic position of the government was that it would “follow” the Kono
Statement. The statement recognizes
“coercion,” as it states, “their recruitment, transfer, control, etc. were
conducted generally against their will, through coaxing, coercion, etc.”

The written answer
in the Diet in 2007 when Abe was in office states, “there was no description
that directly suggested coercive mobilization per se by the military or
administrative/military personnel, in the documents that the government
discovered.” But this does not contradict the Kono Statement, because as Ishihara
Nobuo, Vice Cabinet Secretary when the statement was put together in 1993
admitted in 2006:

“After all, we could not locate any physical evidence that verified
coercion, such as notices and directives, but seeing the result of the hearing
of the sixteen people who were actually made into comfort women, we concluded
that it was impossible that they were making it up, and it was unmistakable
that these people were made into comfort women against their will,”… “We, as
the government, recognized that coercion existed, based on the report by the study
group.” (From an interview with Ishihara Nobuo by the Asia Women’s Fund Oral
History Project, March 7, 2006)

Therefore, it is
illogical for Abe to complain in 2012 about expressions making clear that the
women were “mobilized” and “rounded up.” These expressions were based on
hearings with the victims, which the Japanese government recognized as credible
in 1993. There were no “changes” in the expressions in the textbooks precisely
because all governments since the Kono Statement have declared that they would “follow”
it. When he attacked the MEXT officials in 2012, was Abe stupid enough to misunderstand
his own actions when he declared adherence to the statement five years before?

On December
26, 2012, Abe announced his nineteen new Cabinet members. Nine, including Abe, are members of the
“Group of Diet Members for Consideration of Japan’s Future and History
Education,” which has consistently worked to remove the description of the
military sex slavery and the Nanjing Massacre from textbooks. Thirteen, also
including Abe, are members of the “Discussion Group of the Nippon Kaigi Diet Members,”
affiliated with the “Nippon Kaigi
(Japan Conference),” the biggest right-wing organization in Japan. These numbers
show the far-right character of the new Abe administration.

One of the
Cabinet members, education minister Shimomura Hakubun requires attention.
He is secretary general of the “Discussion Group of NipponKaigi Diet
Members.” He is head of a new department within the LDP called
“Headquarters of Education Renaissance,” which prepared the party’s
“Pledges for Education Policy” for the December 2012 general election. The pledges advocate: 1) cancellation of “biased
education” based on the “masochistic view of history;” 2) abolition of the
“Neighboring Countries Clause” in the textbook screening process, as expressed
in the Miyazawa Statement; 3) reinforcement of patriotic education. Shimomura argues that recognizing the
history of Japan’s aggressive war and critically reflecting on it would represent
a “masochistic view of history.” The world will pay close attention to how
Japanese history textbooks may be distorted under Shimomura’s leadership.

5.
Why the world should be alarmed about Japan

Now that Abe is prime minister again, is he going to try more
double-speak, behaving as a far-rightist history revisionist in Japan but saying
things like “I feel very sorry” (for what Japan did) and “I feel responsible” in
the US? We should never let him get away
with such a double standard.

Abe
appeared on TV on August 28, 2012 and said that Japan could not form true
friendship with Korea if the Kono Statement remained unchanged. Koreans might
retort that “true friendship” is impossible with Japan as long as somebody like
Abe can be prime minister, or even an influential politician; and as long as an
anachronistic clique like the LDP rules the country. This sentiment is shared
not just in Korea but most probably in the whole of Asia.

Let
us repeat the big question again. Is Japan, now with far-rightists history
revisionists like Abe holding power, eligible to be a responsible member of the
international community?

Shimomura
Hakubun, now Education Minister, said in the interview on October 3, 2012:

The “departure from the postwar regime”
slogan that the previous Abe administration put forward means revising all
aspects of Japan’s modern history, including the Tokyo War Tribunal view of
history, the Kono Statement, and the Murayama Statement.

The
“Tokyo War Tribunal view of history” presupposes that the International
Military War Tribunal for the Far East (1946 to 1948), in which Japan was tried
and convicted as an aggressor, is unacceptable as it was a victors’ trial.

But Article 11 of
the Treaty of Peace with Japan says, “Japan accepts the judgments of
the International Military Tribunal for the Far East and of other Allied War
Crimes Courts both within and outside Japan.” This means that Japan accepted that
it invaded neighboring Asian nations.

If Abe and Shimomura want to “review”
the “Tokyo War Tribunal view of history,” the logical requirement would be that
the Japanese government would formally disavow the Tribunal’s conclusions and
notify all the forty-eight countries that signed the Treaty of Peace with Japan
accordingly. It appears that Abe and his far-rightist ilk do not understand how
unrealistic and ridiculous such a move would be regarded.

These forces
insistently deny the facts of Japan’s aggressive wars, openly defend the
indefensible view of the war as “for self-existence and self-defense,” and
condemn any admittance of aggression as masochistic. The fact that such forces
grasped power again poses a serious threat to Japan’s democracy and its
credibility in the world. It is also a major challenge to the international
community, particularly Asia.

We hope the world
will counterattack Abe’s far-rightist history revisionist challenge, and once
he is outside of Japan that there will be protests wherever he goes, and at
press conferences; and that journalists will confront Abe at press conferences with
the facts laid out above. This is the only effective way to let Abe know what a
shameless human being he is, according to all international standards.

Narusawa Muneo is an editor of Shukan Kin’yobi, a weekly magazine established in 1993. He
is author of “オバマの危険―新政権の隠された本性（Danger of Obama: The True Character of the New
Administration）” (Kin’yobi, 2009).